Legal Opinion

Loveless v. City of Chehalis

Washington Supreme Court

Decided February 17, 1925No. 19021. Department TwoPublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHolcomb, J.

A motion by respondents to strike an affidavit included in the transcript and not in the statement of facts, in support of a motion to extend the time for filing the proposed statement of facts by appellant, which is preliminary to a motion to strike the statement of facts itself, is denied as not well taken. Disregarding the affidavit, there is an order in the record extending the time for filing the proposed statement of facts, and we have always held that the discretion of the trial court in extending the time for filing a proposed statement of facts would not be disturbed unless abused.…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Maryland Realty Co. v. City of TacomaWashington Supreme Court · 1922
  2. State ex rel. Bickford v. BensonWashington Supreme Court · 1899
  3. Collins v. City of SpokaneWashington Supreme Court · 1923
  4. Greely v. NewcombWashington Supreme Court · 1899
  5. Schroeder v. City of RaymondWashington Supreme Court · 1921

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. State Ex Rel. Johnson v. City of DaytonWashington Supreme Court · 1939
  2. State Ex Rel. Larson v. City of VancouverWashington Supreme Court · 1931
  3. Maguire v. WhillockIdaho Supreme Court · 1942
  4. City of Everett v. MorganWashington Supreme Court · 1925
  5. State Ex Rel. Larson v. City of VancouverWashington Supreme Court · 1931

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API